An update concerning the long-rumored document on the admission of homosexuals to Catholic seminaries, being prepared under the aegis of the Congregation for Catholic Education.

In various drafts, the idea of a document on this subject has been around for years. In April 2003, however, a special closed-door Vatican summit on pedophilia seemed to arrest its momentum. During that session, scientific experts on sexual abuse told Vatican officials that homosexuality does not "cause" abuse. They said it is a risk factor associated with clerical sexual abuse, but so are many other things - such as being ordained less than five years.

Sources told NCR at the time that these statements impressed a number of senior Vatican officials. One Latin American cardinal said at the time, "It's clear to me that a man's bio-genetic makeup shouldn't be our interest so much as his behavior."

In fact, however, the document is far from dead.

"The Holy Father wants it, so there will have to be a document," a senior Vatican official told NCR in late May. This official offered no prediction, however, as to when the document might appear.

As to content, the official said the document would to some extent repeat the norms contained in a 1961 instruction of the Congregation for Religious, titled Religiosorum institution, which stated: "Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination."

One key is what exactly the term "homosexuality" means. At one pole, a single same-sex attraction experienced years ago and never acted upon might mark someone as "homosexual." The other pole might restrict the definition of "homosexuality" to active and on-going sexual behavior. Most people would probably reject the former as overly strict, and the latter as overly loose. The question, then, is where to fall in between.

The senior Vatican official told NCR the document would likely not settle this question.

"It's not reasonable to expect the Holy See to get into those details," the official said. "That's something that almost has to be determined on a case-by-case basis."

It seems therefore probable that bishops will retain some flexibility in deciding how to apply whatever standards are set out in the document. Dioceses that have a strict policy against the admission of homosexuals will continue, but those who emphasize a candidate's capacity for celibacy, rather than sexual orientation in se, could argue that such a candidate is not "homosexual" in the sense intended under the norms.

It's possible, therefore, that the thunderclap the document will cause in the press will not be matched by changed realities on the ground.

A predilection to sodomy is NOT genetically determined - just a serious behavioral and spiritual disorder, a sick "perversion" as His Eminence Gustaaf Cardinal Joos (of Belgium) recently explained to members of the press. You may find the following statement by the Catholic Medical Association helpful in this regard: http://www.rcf.org/docs/homosexuality_and_hope.htm

2."They said it is a risk factor associated with clerical sexual abuse" Yes, a MAJOR risk factor - in the John Jay report, more than 80% of victims were boys. For more on this association, please see: http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS02E3

3."As to content, the official said the document would to some extent repeat the norms contained in a 1961 instruction of the Congregation for Religious, titled Religiosorum institution, which stated: "Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination."" The above decree (by Pope John XXIII) has never been retracted, and so remains the norm. With all the "pink palace" seminaries and "lavender mafia" chancery officials, it should be abundantly clear that the above norms have been ignored. It's not more wordy documents we need, it's discipline. Spare the rod - and spoil the child!

As to content, the official said the document would to some extent repeat the norms contained in a 1961 instruction of the Congregation for Religious, titled Religiosorum institution, which stated: "Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination."

Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers.

"It's not reasonable to expect the Holy See to get into those details," the official said. "That's something that almost has to be determined on a case-by-case basis."

This following information is best posted without a link ...

"Penile plethysmography is a test measuring the variation of penis size in response to audio and/or visual stimuli. The size of the penis is commonly determined by its circumference using a mercury strain gauge, and was originally intended as a way of measuring sexual arousal. The Penile plethysmograph (PPG) device was developed by Czechoslovak researcher Kurt Freund in the 1950s. The motivation for its development was to prevent draft dodgers from claiming that they were homosexual in order to avoid military service."

As to content, the official said the document would to some extent repeat the norms contained in a 1961 instruction of the Congregation for Religious, titled Religiosorum institution, which stated: "Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination."

One key is what exactly the term "homosexuality" means. At one pole, a single same-sex attraction experienced years ago and never acted upon might mark someone as "homosexual." The other pole might restrict the definition of "homosexuality" to active and on-going sexual behavior. Most people would probably reject the former as overly strict, and the latter as overly loose. The question, then, is where to fall in between.

The senior Vatican official told NCR the document would likely not settle this question.

Ping. (As usual, if you would like to be added to or removed from my "conservative Catholics" ping list, please send me a FReepmail. Please note that this is occasionally a high volume ping list and some of my ping posts are long.)"

Just keep in mind that it took a long while for the reforms of Trent to take effect. They met the same stubborn resistence. A whole generation of malefactors had to die off before they were allowed to take root. Many never did, and in the 18th Century, laxity appeared again. Thank of the trouble that St. Alphonsus had, and he was a tough-minded guy and good organizer.

The fact that psychological testing just might elicit a forced response that would include someone who had some homosexual "thoughts" years ago as a homosexual is very scary. I would venture that everyone with reasonably good recall has thought about it,even if just to imagine what goes on and shuddering.

Back in the days,before testing for everything was in vogue,and when the average citizen was endowed with a modicum of common sense I would feel confident in endorsing the statements in the 1961 document from the Vatican. In these crazy times,where every man thinks his own opinion is as important and valid as the next man's is a different story.

Reading through the religious forum on a regular basis gives a small idea of the mountains people make of molehills. I am worried about this,and anyone who cares about the future of the Church and western civilization should be worried too. We have to learn how to work together for the greater glory of God ASAP. Or at least figure out who to trust.

That is one reason I am always carping about bad bishops and trying to identify the heterodox,marxist,progressive,homosex sympathizing bishops. I hope many can recognize the problems this is going to cause and start thinking about how this identification of homosexuals can be accomplished without forcing candidates to lie,while concomitantly not throwing every man who admits that he has thought about it out on his ear. It's a problem.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.